Appeals court revives Sarah Palin defamation lawsuit against The New York Times 2 years after it was dismissed

A defamation lawsuit brought by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin against The New York Times has been revived two years after being dismissed.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday said that Palin's lawsuit can proceed, overturning an August 2017 dismissal by U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff, reports The Hollywood Reporter.

Palin sued the Times in 2017 over an editorial that was published after a man shot Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and other Republicans at Congressional Baseball Game practice, The Washington Post reports. The editorial referenced the 2011 shooting of former Democratic Rep. Gabby Giffords, writing that prior to it, "Sarah Palin's political action committee circulated a map of targeted electoral districts that put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosshairs."

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

The Times soon issued a correction, writing that the editorial "incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting" when "no such link was established" and clarifying that the map was "incorrectly" described in the article because it depicted "electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath stylized crosshairs."

When the case was dismissed in 2017, Judge Rakoff said that the editorial, which contained a "few factual inaccuracies" that were "very rapidly corrected," may constitute "negligence" but was "plainly" not defamation, per the Post. But on Tuesday, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals said "the district court erred" in its dismissal of the case because it relied "on facts outside the pleadings" when Palin "plausibly states a claim for defamation." The appeals court also said that this is ultimately about "rules of procedure and pleading standards."

The Times in response said that "we are disappointed in the decision and intend to continue to defend the action vigorously," The Hill reports.